"Upgrade" from 60csx to Colorado?

[bmirak]

I currently own a 60csx. I do a lot of off-trail hiking and I use my GPS primarily for (1) hiking navigation, (2) measuring distance to waypoints, (3) monitoring elevation gain, and (4) recording highly-detailed (.01 mile) tracks. I also use it for road navigation.

 

These new Colorado units have me torn. I really like the shaded elevations and the 3D-View looks cool, plus the larger screen and supposedly better handling. However, I am really concerned about battery life and being able to read the screen. I've also seen some other complaints on this board about the CO from other 60csx users - though I think these mainly apply to geocaching?

 

I heard another complaint that you cannot upload custom waypoint symbols to the CO? Is that true?

 

I also don't like losing the SirfStarIII chipset. Legitimate concern?

 

Can you really not "relocate waypoint here" with the CO?

 

Based on the little I know (not much) - the CO strikes me as "more toy than tool" when compared to the 60csx. Do you think replacing my 60csx with a CO would really be an upgrade?

Edited March 18, 2008 by bmirak

[+Thrak]

I own a 76CSx. I love it. Do I want a Colorado? dadgum right I do. Will I buy one soon? Nope. I'll wait until they work out the bugs better and the price drops. If you want to be an early adopter then expect to have to deal with various issues. If that isn't your cup of tea then wait.

[+g-o-cashers]

Here's a comparison of the two units.

 

GO$Rs

[+the hermit crabs]

Here's a comparison of the two units.

 

GO$Rs

That's an excellent list; thanks for putting it together.

 

Judging by the sets of capabilities that each device has that the other doesn't support, I don't see that the Colorado would be considered an "upgrade" over the 60CSx, or vice-versa. It seems to be more of a lateral move to something that's just different.

[+Thrak]

The big reasons the Colorado interests me are the increased number of waypoints/geocaches and having the cache page right there in the unit so I could get rid of the dang Palm.

 

Some of the other "features" of the Colorado turn me off pretty badly. Things I am used to being able to do easily on the 76CSx are either more difficult to do or missing altogether.

[+g-o-cashers]

Agreed, at this point in time each unit has different strengths and weaknesses.

 

The frustrating part (for me) is that Garmin won't say what the long term plan is. Are the shortcomings in the Colorado just temporary and it will eventually include (nearly?) everything the 60csx supports or will the chart look similar a year from now?

 

I think what you are seeing is the result of moving Garmin's handheld line to a totally new software infrastructure. Prior to the Colorado there was probably a codebase of features that the eTrex, 60/76 series, etc shared and it was built on a common/similar infrastructure that looked and felt the same. When new units came out they got some new features but they almost always kept the old features too.

 

The Colorado has come out on what appears to be a software infrastructure similar to the Nuvis. This makes sense, because Garmin wants to leverage a common infrastructure across more products. You have to imagine there was a lot of stuff for the handheld market that needed to be developed/ported to this new environment. Garmin cut some corners, probably decided to deprecate certain features and is now in an awkward situation because they don't have feature parity with the units they probably hope to replace with the Colorado.

 

GO$Rs

[MtnHermit]

Here's a comparison of the two units.

That's an excellent comparison, particularly the personal observations at the bottom.

 

Thanks

[+YBLee]

I've been using Garmin instruments since the mid 90's. Aside from the 2610, the 60CSx is the best in class and a mature product. I cannot figure out why Garmin would bring such a beta product to market before its time. FYI, I had one for two+ weeks with revision 1.4. The only thing I can say about it is its got great potential but it is not even close to the 60CSx in functionality at this point. I've been an earlier adopter of electronic products since the seventies but I never seen a product released that was this handicapped out of the gate to date. I will own one some day but for now, the 60CSx is the GPS for choice and I would recommend it over the Colorado in a heart beat!

[+webscouter.]

I had both a 60CS and a 60CSx when they were first introduced. Both of them had the same growing pains that the Colorado is currently going through.

 

Maybe Garmin releases the GPS once it is functional and uses the Groundspeak boards as a way to find out what features are really wanted.

 

ATTN Garmin, I want a search near the cursor and a search waypoints by icon type feature in the next release. Pretty please.

[+SidAndBob]

I currently own a 60csx. I do a lot of off-trail hiking and I use my GPS primarily for (1) hiking navigation, (2) measuring distance to waypoints, (3) monitoring elevation gain, and (4) recording highly-detailed (.01 mile) tracks. I also use it for road navigation.

I'm in the same boat as you. Previously I used a CSx and a Palm PDA. After a lot of research I have just bought an HTC TyTN II PPC, which does loads more than a CO.

 

........CSx + Palm....CO.....TyTN II

SiRF III......Y........N........Y

3D maps.......N........Y........N

Topo..........Y........Y........N

Detailed maps N........N........Y (Memory Map)

Listings......Y........Y*.......Y *=limited functionality

WiFi..........N........N........Y

Memory (GB)...4........4.......32

Wherigo......N........Y........Y

Sound.........N........N........Y

TomTom .......N........N........Y

Phone.........N........N........Y

Data Services N........N........Y

Movies .......N........N........Y

MP3...........N........N........Y

Waterproof....Y/N......Y........N

Camera........N........N........Y

Keyboard......N........N........Y

Touch screen..N/Y......N........Y

Waypoints...1000.....1000....Unlimited

 

Battery life is an issue with the PPC, but this can easily be overcome with a battery extender.

As the PPC can run a host of applications you can decide what you want to run on it. An example is that I use QuickGPS which loads the next 7 days satellite locations from the Internet. This mean that satellite aquisition is lightning fast.

Garmin wanted to cache in on a market, but it's a very half-hearted effort.

The CSx is fantastic, but if you need that bit more then check out the TyTN II. I will still use my CSx as my primary caching / hiking GPSr.

[+Red90]

For your needs, the 60csx will be better.